Asynchronous generally means not synchronized or coordinated. It is the opposite of in unison or at the same time. Asynchronous learning is a method of teaching/learning used most often in online learning (though perhaps this is changing?) due to its flexibility. It allows for networking and information sharing free of the constraints of time and space.
Some examples of simple online asynchronous tools include emailing, message/discussion boards, watching videos, etc. Some examples of asynchronous tools/sites for language learning are Rocket Languages, Lingq, Memrise, and Anki.
There is debate as to the effectiveness of asynchronous programs for language, and other types of learning, though both have benefits and limitations. For example, asynchronous learning can provide opportunities for additional feedback and practice; enable learners to express thoughts and reflect on learning; and help users feel more confident (Gleason and Suvorov seminar reading). However, the asynchronous learner may feel isolated and lack social support, and discussions might be more difficult to facilitate (Hrastinski, 2008).
From the few readings I have done for this course so far, and the knowledge I have gained from the M.Ed program so far, I agree with Hrastinski’s suggestion that the question is not whether synchronous or asynchronous learning is “better”, or more effective, but that there is a time and place for both approaches. (If you follow the link below, Table 3 “When, Why, and How to Use Asynchronous vs. Synchronous E-Learning” illustrates this). In our discussion in class I said that asynchronous learning would be better for learning a language, but Ellen held the exact opposite view. I wonder if certain content is better suited to one approach (like oral language for example), or if user/learner preference is what matters. I think people often choose what type of program to use/take according to their circumstance more so than for their learning preference or content which could be problematic for their success and enjoyment.
Feedback welcome J
Elizabeth
Sources:
Gleason J., Suvorov, R. (2011). Learner perceptions of achromous oral computer-mediated communication
tasks using Wimba Voice for developing their L2 oral proficiency. In S. Huffman & V. Hegelheimer (Eds.) The role of CALL in hybrid and online language courses. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous & synchronous e-learning. A study of asynchronous and synchronous e-learning methods discovered that each supports different purposes. Educause Quarterly. Number 4. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0848.pdf
Hybrid Learning
Hybrid learning is likened to a Plinko chip in the game of Price is Right. The chip has an equal chance of falling either left or right of the slot. Hybrid learning is where the learner has the option of learning on their own and with more of structural learning format. Researches feel that many formal learning environments are too rigid and highly structured paradigms offer much less value in learning. Currently if the learner does fit the learning outcomes set out by the preordained curriculum then the learner is deemed unsuccessful. Even though the learners may have learned a lot more than someone who plays the system well. In most hybrid learning courses there are some face-to-face interactions along with an online component. Hybrid learning is becoming an effective tool for many educational institutions in tight economical times when they want to maximize the learning and reduce cost.
Although informal learning occurs in an institutional context, it is not highly structured. The content and value of what is to be learned is placed on the hand of the learner. It is the journey of learning and how the learner got to the end is valued more than just the end product. The students can follow their on path or be led down a more "serpetine path". This maybe due to their own curiosity or because of the guidance of the instructor. They will be able to coached in person by the teacher or interactions with others in online communities. In blended learning environments, students will access to wide variety resources and some of them can be quite divergent. Students will be given the choice to explore and use as many resources as they feel is needed for their learning. They will also have flexibility in the way they want to present their understanding of their learning.
Source:
Dubreil, S., Young, D., & Canfield, W. (2011). The "Plinko" principle and language programs: Designing non- linear hybrid learning environments and desiderata for implementation. In S. Huffman & V.Hegelheimer (Eds.), The role of CALL in hybrid and online language courses. Ames, IA: Iowa
State University.
DESIGNING LEARNING TASKS USING TECHNOLOGY (Thava- In progress)
Another great way to learn a new language is through social media. Web 2.0 tools allow learners the capacity to engage in the knowledge building process. However according to the authors it depends on the learners capacity to "engage in the creating and maintenance of the dialogic process." Dialogue will not just emerge from the use of Web 2.0 technology. It is always co-evolving with technology. The authors suggest two associated concepts with dialogue:
Dialectic: This includes the cognitive and knowledge building dimensions
Dialogic: This includes the emotional and interpersonal dimensions.
These two dimensions are interrelated in the learning process.
Here are some considerations related to creating a learning task around language learning and technology. (Martins et al 2012): "- Focus should be on meaning and the mobilisation of language skills should come naturally when attempting to solve the task; - The completion of a task leads to an accurate outcome; - A task is not, generally, exclusively linguistic; - Resolution of a task involves social interaction; - Task execution is affected by certain constraints and limitations; - Solving tasks involves the deployment of cognitive processes and different skills; - Tasks involve different steps or sub-tasks; - Tasks should privilege authenticity."
Source:
Martinsa, M. D. L. C., Moreirab, G., & Moreirab, A. (2012, August). Web 2.0 and Authentic Foreign Language Learning at Higher Education Level. In Call: Using, Learning, Knowing, EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 22-25 August 2012, Proceedings (p. 64). Research-publishing. net.
Motivation in an Asynchronous CALL Environment
A lack of time and motivation are two factors that researchers have determined to play key roles in the high dropout rates in e-learning courses. Motivation is the degree of the choice learners make and the degree of effort they will exert for learning. Continual motivation is facilitated by an intrinsic interest in the activity for learning and reflects the learner’s willingness to learn. The learner is willing to perform when their learning produces a new or improved skill. Previous research has indicated motivation in a computer-assisted learning environment to be influenced by challenge, fantasy and curiosity – all components of intrinsic motivation. Additionally, three specific types of motivation are said to be the motivation to initiate, to persist and to continue. Learners choose the web-based medium grounded on their beliefs about their own ability and the difficulty of the task.
Specifically, an asynchronous learning e-learning environment is known to have a decrease in interaction between participants, their peers, and the instructor in comparison to synchronous environments. Actions such as clicking buttons to change pages are considered familiarization interactions, and are not significant enough to encourage the learner to participate in construction of their own knowledge. However, the onus is on the student to direct their own pace and interaction with peers and instructional materials an in independent manner.
Studies involving students learning languages online have argued that asynchronous discussions can be student centred when students are given more control and face less of the negative aspects that a traditional classroom can offer. Research suggests that the comfort of one’s home environment makes it more likely that the student will participate in discussions that are of a higher quality and more complex language than in synchronous situations. Students in the online environment use anonymity to shield their personal self from their online persona, thus creating the perception of a safe environment for learning.
One study by Polar et al (2013) found:
Asynchronous discussion forums can be an effective tool for producing second language acquisition, especially for students that are motivated by increases in their self-esteen
Students that participate in asynchronous discussions for building self-esteem or ego will participate more when they are held accountable via their identity as opposed to posting anonymously
Students that are motivated to participate in asynchronous discussions because of the importance of the task are likely to participate whether they are anonymous or not
Higher quality of second language production in asynchronous discussions occurs when students are accountable via their identity
References
Kim, Kyong-Jee. “Motivational Influences in Self-Directed Online Learning Environments: A Qualitative Case Study.” Paper presented at the 2004 International Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). AECT 2004 Annual Proceedings, Volume 1. October 2004. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED485041.pdf
Polar, N., Mancilla, R., & Mahalingappa, L. (2013). Anonymity and Motivation in Asynchronous Discussions and L2 Vocabulary Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 17 (2), pp. 57-74. http://llt,msu.edu/issues/june2013/polatetal.pdf
(submitted by Robyn Feeney)
Lesson Delivery There are two approaches to learning, a teacher centered approach and a student centered approach. CALL adopts the student-centered approach and many argue that currently that’s the most effective approach in language acquisition but just learning in general.In teacher-centered education, students put all of their focus on the teacher. The teacher talks, while the students exclusively listen. During activities, students work alone, and collaboration is discouraged.Pros
When education is teacher-centered, the classroom remains orderly. Students are quiet, and the teacher retains full control of the classroom and its activities.
Because students learn on their own, they learn to be independent and make their own decisions.
Because the teacher directs all classroom activities, they don’t have to worry that students will miss an important topic.
Cons
When students work alone, they don’t learn to collaborate with other students, and communication skills may suffer.
Teacher-centered instruction can get boring for students. Their minds may wander, and they may miss important facts.
Teacher-centered instruction doesn’t allow students to express themselves, ask questions and direct their own learning.
When a classroom operates with student-centered instruction, students and instructors share the focus. Instead of listening to the teacher exclusively, students and teachers interact equally. Group work is encouraged, and students learn to collaborate and communicate with one another.Pros
Students learn important communicative and collaborative skills through group work.
Students learn to direct their own learning, ask questions and complete tasks independently.
Students are more interested in learning activities when they can interact with one another and participate actively.
Cons
Because students are talking, classrooms are often busy, noisy and chaotic.
Teachers must attempt to manage all students’ activities at once, which can be difficult when students are working on different stages of the same project.
Because the teacher doesn’t deliver instruction to all students at once, some students may miss important facts.
Some students prefer to work alone, so group work can become problematic.
Both of these approaches have their up’s and down’s but there certainly needs to be a balance between the two approaches to ensure that all student needs are met. When both approaches are used together, students can enjoy the positives of both types of education. Instead of getting bored with teacher-centered education or losing sight of their goals in a completely student-centered classroom, pupils can benefit from a well-balanced educational atmosphere. http://assessment.uconn.edu/docs/TeacherCenteredVsLearnerCenteredParadigms.pdf
(Farishta, Amiri)
Teacher 2.0 With the increase in autonomous learning supported by various software programs, digital tools and social media, there is a concern for the role of the teacher in the future when it comes to second language acquisition. Some scholars have argued, such as Mark Warschaur, that CALL will evolve to take over the teacher but others, such as Jones, have defended the presence of a language instructor in L2 learning. Both have strong claims that are supported by studies on the effectiveness of CALL and MALL but for now there is a balance between the two claims. The term Teacher 2.0 has developed in order to direct attention to the influence of technology not just on students and their learning but the role of teachers. The term is an indicator of change. Change in role of the teacher, change in relationship of the teacher with student, and a change in teaching. Teachers’ and students’ relationships are changing, as they learn from each other. Teacher’s roles are shifting from owners of information to facilitators and guides to learning. Educators are finding different ways of using class time. Introverted students are finding ways to participate in class discussions online. Different approaches to teaching are being used in the same class. Students are getting a global perspective. http://teacher20.com/ The website is one of the many resources available to teachers seeking ways to learn more about the variety of ways to incorporate technology in their lessons. Also serves as a platform for dialogue and the transfer of knowledge on various areas of discussion.
Asynchronous learning is a method of teaching/learning used most often in online learning (though perhaps this is changing?) due to its flexibility. It allows for networking and information sharing free of the constraints of time and space.
Some examples of simple online asynchronous tools include emailing, message/discussion boards, watching videos, etc. Some examples of asynchronous tools/sites for language learning are Rocket Languages, Lingq, Memrise, and Anki.
There is debate as to the effectiveness of asynchronous programs for language, and other types of learning, though both have benefits and limitations. For example, asynchronous learning can provide opportunities for additional feedback and practice; enable learners to express thoughts and reflect on learning; and help users feel more confident (Gleason and Suvorov seminar reading). However, the asynchronous learner may feel isolated and lack social support, and discussions might be more difficult to facilitate (Hrastinski, 2008).
From the few readings I have done for this course so far, and the knowledge I have gained from the M.Ed program so far, I agree with Hrastinski’s suggestion that the question is not whether synchronous or asynchronous learning is “better”, or more effective, but that there is a time and place for both approaches. (If you follow the link below, Table 3 “When, Why, and How to Use Asynchronous vs. Synchronous E-Learning” illustrates this). In our discussion in class I said that asynchronous learning would be better for learning a language, but Ellen held the exact opposite view. I wonder if certain content is better suited to one approach (like oral language for example), or if user/learner preference is what matters. I think people often choose what type of program to use/take according to their circumstance more so than for their learning preference or content which could be problematic for their success and enjoyment.
Feedback welcome J
Elizabeth
Sources:
Gleason J., Suvorov, R. (2011). Learner perceptions of achromous oral computer-mediated communication
tasks using Wimba Voice for developing their L2 oral proficiency. In S. Huffman & V. Hegelheimer (Eds.) The role of CALL in hybrid and online language courses. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous & synchronous e-learning. A study of asynchronous and synchronous e-learning methods discovered that each supports different purposes. Educause Quarterly. Number 4.
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0848.pdf
Hybrid Learning
Hybrid learning is likened to a Plinko chip in the game of Price is Right. The chip has an equal chance of falling either left or right of the slot. Hybrid learning is where the learner has the option of learning on their own and with more of structural learning format. Researches feel that many formal learning environments are too rigid and highly structured paradigms offer much less value in learning. Currently if the learner does fit the learning outcomes set out by the preordained curriculum then the learner is deemed unsuccessful. Even though the learners may have learned a lot more than someone who plays the system well. In most hybrid learning courses there are some face-to-face interactions along with an online component. Hybrid learning is becoming an effective tool for many educational institutions in tight economical times when they want to maximize the learning and reduce cost.
Although informal learning occurs in an institutional context, it is not highly structured. The content and value of what is to be learned is placed on the hand of the learner. It is the journey of learning and how the learner got to the end is valued more than just the end product. The students can follow their on path or be led down a more "serpetine path". This maybe due to their own curiosity or because of the guidance of the instructor. They will be able to coached in person by the teacher or interactions with others in online communities. In blended learning environments, students will access to wide variety resources and some of them can be quite divergent. Students will be given the choice to explore and use as many resources as they feel is needed for their learning. They will also have flexibility in the way they want to present their understanding of their learning.
Source:
Dubreil, S., Young, D., & Canfield, W. (2011). The "Plinko" principle and language programs: Designing non- linear hybrid learning environments and desiderata for implementation. In S. Huffman & V.Hegelheimer (Eds.), The role of CALL in hybrid and online language courses. Ames, IA: Iowa
State University.
DESIGNING LEARNING TASKS USING TECHNOLOGY (Thava- In progress)
Another great way to learn a new language is through social media. Web 2.0 tools allow learners the capacity to engage in the knowledge building process. However according to the authors it depends on the learners capacity to "engage in the creating and maintenance of the dialogic process." Dialogue will not just emerge from the use of Web 2.0 technology. It is always co-evolving with technology. The authors suggest two associated concepts with dialogue:
Dialectic: This includes the cognitive and knowledge building dimensions
Dialogic: This includes the emotional and interpersonal dimensions.
These two dimensions are interrelated in the learning process.
Here are some considerations related to creating a learning task around language learning and technology. (Martins et al 2012):
"- Focus should be on meaning and the mobilisation of language skills
should come naturally when attempting to solve the task;
- The completion of a task leads to an accurate outcome;
- A task is not, generally, exclusively linguistic;
- Resolution of a task involves social interaction;
- Task execution is affected by certain constraints and limitations;
- Solving tasks involves the deployment of cognitive processes and different skills;
- Tasks involve different steps or sub-tasks;
- Tasks should privilege authenticity."
Source:
Martinsa, M. D. L. C., Moreirab, G., & Moreirab, A. (2012, August). Web 2.0 and Authentic Foreign Language Learning at Higher Education Level. In Call: Using, Learning, Knowing, EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 22-25 August 2012, Proceedings (p. 64). Research-publishing. net.
Motivation in an Asynchronous CALL Environment
A lack of time and motivation are two factors that researchers have determined to play key roles in the high dropout rates in e-learning courses. Motivation is the degree of the choice learners make and the degree of effort they will exert for learning. Continual motivation is facilitated by an intrinsic interest in the activity for learning and reflects the learner’s willingness to learn. The learner is willing to perform when their learning produces a new or improved skill. Previous research has indicated motivation in a computer-assisted learning environment to be influenced by challenge, fantasy and curiosity – all components of intrinsic motivation. Additionally, three specific types of motivation are said to be the motivation to initiate, to persist and to continue. Learners choose the web-based medium grounded on their beliefs about their own ability and the difficulty of the task.Specifically, an asynchronous learning e-learning environment is known to have a decrease in interaction between participants, their peers, and the instructor in comparison to synchronous environments. Actions such as clicking buttons to change pages are considered familiarization interactions, and are not significant enough to encourage the learner to participate in construction of their own knowledge. However, the onus is on the student to direct their own pace and interaction with peers and instructional materials an in independent manner.
The following table taken from the online article “Asynchronous Learning and Adult Motivation: Catching Fog in a Gauze Bag” links ten instructional design tips with practical software design/programming suggestions to encourage engagement of students in asynchronous e-learning.
Studies involving students learning languages online have argued that asynchronous discussions can be student centred when students are given more control and face less of the negative aspects that a traditional classroom can offer. Research suggests that the comfort of one’s home environment makes it more likely that the student will participate in discussions that are of a higher quality and more complex language than in synchronous situations. Students in the online environment use anonymity to shield their personal self from their online persona, thus creating the perception of a safe environment for learning.
One study by Polar et al (2013) found:
References
Kim, Kyong-Jee. “Motivational Influences in Self-Directed Online Learning Environments: A Qualitative Case Study.” Paper presented at the 2004 International Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). AECT 2004 Annual Proceedings, Volume 1. October 2004. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED485041.pdf
Polar, N., Mancilla, R., & Mahalingappa, L. (2013). Anonymity and Motivation in Asynchronous Discussions and L2 Vocabulary Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 17 (2), pp. 57-74. http://llt,msu.edu/issues/june2013/polatetal.pdf
(submitted by Robyn Feeney)
Lesson Delivery
There are two approaches to learning, a teacher centered approach and a student centered approach. CALL adopts the student-centered approach and many argue that currently that’s the most effective approach in language acquisition but just learning in general.In teacher-centered education, students put all of their focus on the teacher. The teacher talks, while the students exclusively listen. During activities, students work alone, and collaboration is discouraged.Pros
Cons
When a classroom operates with student-centered instruction, students and instructors share the focus. Instead of listening to the teacher exclusively, students and teachers interact equally. Group work is encouraged, and students learn to collaborate and communicate with one another.Pros
- Students learn important communicative and collaborative skills through group work.
- Students learn to direct their own learning, ask questions and complete tasks independently.
- Students are more interested in learning activities when they can interact with one another and participate actively.
ConsBoth of these approaches have their up’s and down’s but there certainly needs to be a balance between the two approaches to ensure that all student needs are met. When both approaches are used together, students can enjoy the positives of both types of education. Instead of getting bored with teacher-centered education or losing sight of their goals in a completely student-centered classroom, pupils can benefit from a well-balanced educational atmosphere.
http://assessment.uconn.edu/docs/TeacherCenteredVsLearnerCenteredParadigms.pdf
(Farishta, Amiri)
Teacher 2.0
With the increase in autonomous learning supported by various software programs, digital tools and social media, there is a concern for the role of the teacher in the future when it comes to second language acquisition. Some scholars have argued, such as Mark Warschaur, that CALL will evolve to take over the teacher but others, such as Jones, have defended the presence of a language instructor in L2 learning. Both have strong claims that are supported by studies on the effectiveness of CALL and MALL but for now there is a balance between the two claims.
The term Teacher 2.0 has developed in order to direct attention to the influence of technology not just on students and their learning but the role of teachers. The term is an indicator of change. Change in role of the teacher, change in relationship of the teacher with student, and a change in teaching. Teachers’ and students’ relationships are changing, as they learn from each other. Teacher’s roles are shifting from owners of information to facilitators and guides to learning. Educators are finding different ways of using class time. Introverted students are finding ways to participate in class discussions online. Different approaches to teaching are being used in the same class. Students are getting a global perspective.
http://teacher20.com/ The website is one of the many resources available to teachers seeking ways to learn more about the variety of ways to incorporate technology in their lessons. Also serves as a platform for dialogue and the transfer of knowledge on various areas of discussion.
(Farishta, Amiri).